Rittenberg: 7 wins or less and RR is gone
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/11669/big-ten-friday-mailblog-…
Some dumb Virginian broad, who is self-proclaimed hot shit, wrote in to Rittenberg claiming that RR needs 10 wins to keep his job this year. Rittenberg's rebuttal says that RR needs 8, maybe 9, wins to keep his job. This number seems to get larger and larger all the time...
I wouldn't say he needs X amount of wins, but rather a top 3 or 4 finish in the Big Ten and a Bowl Game.
April 16th, 2010 at 10:02 PM ^
This isn't our first thread about "Kelly from Manassas, Va." It appears that she is a Penn State fan, and she e-mails Rittenberg on a weekly basis demanding that Rich Rodriguez be fired if he doesn't win ten games this year. I'm actually surprised Rittenberg published another question from her, because she sounds like a total nutjob. Here is the last thread.......
http://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/rittenberg-rejects-psu-fans-dubious-take-ri…
I would tend to agree with him
It should be seven wins or fewer.
Right/wrong is a judgment of morality. You should have said he's "incorrect."
April 16th, 2010 at 11:23 PM ^
On the Internet at least...
That's not actually all that surprising. 7 wins and a bowl win or 8 wins and a bowl loss. Anything less and I could see him being let go. I don't think it would be the right decision, but it's not out of the question.
if 3 of the wins are MSU, OSU and ND.
Thinking that he needs 10 wins to survive is foolish, he's safe for at least another year with 8 wins.
failure to be at 6 wins with three of them against MSU OSU and ND.
THat means we lost to a bunch of teams we should of beat.
We are at 7 wins before figuring these games IMO.
It's sad, but at this point, probably true (7 or 8 wins).
I'm hoping, and I believe that Dave Brandon sees the big picture, and hasn't set an ultimatum for wins. Personally, even if the team only wins 6 games next year and gets blown out in a crappy bowl game, I'd keep RR. He needs to be here four years.
RR's first full recruiting class won't be upperclassmen until next year. So I'm moderately hopeful for this upcoming season, but I think that next year is the year where we really put it all together. Tate and Denard will be juniors, as will most of the slot guys. The running backs will have another year of seasoning, and so will the vast majority of the defense.
It's just a matter of getting all of the rabble rabbles to hang on for one more year if this year isn't great.
We will be stacked everywhere in 2011 but just imagine this OL:
LT Lewan
LG Barnum
C Molk
RG Omameh
RT Schofield
So athletic.
I would imagine Q Dub will fit in there somewhere as well.
And, maybe intentionally, you left off Huyge, who started most of last season and will likely start this season as well. He will be a 5th year senior with a lot of starting experience. He might not have the talent that Schofield has, but he'll be tougher to unseat.
good point.
I did think of Huyge and I agree with you that I probably should have mentioned him as well.
I was focusing more on our young crop of OL that will be emerging. However, I should not underestimate Huyge, or Mealer or Khoury for that matter.
It is my prediction, however, that with added experience and added strength/size, Schofield will be the starting RT in 2011.
Although, point taken.
It's a bit odd that you don't want to see a set minimum win total but then you present a minimum tenure figure. While I personally think there's a minimum win total required, I can understand flexibility with regard to that figure, just as I would with regard to years on the job.
If it appears, after this season, that RR can't get the job done (or can't do it without embarrassing the University), then giving him a 4th season would be a terrible waste of time and reputation. Recruiting would become even more difficult. Internal divisions would grow. It would be a mess.
There is a monumentally huge difference between setting a win total and a tenure total. That's all that I will say regarding the issue. If you don't understand it, fine, but it's a fact.
So let's say he doesn't get 7 wins. What coach would we hire to come to Michigan? I don't think there are many "spread" coaches that we would A) want or B) be available. I absolutely DO NOT want another 3 years of struggling pains to move back to a pro-style. That would be a disaster. Hopefully Brandon realizes this and even if RR's success is only a half-success, we keep him for the full term of his initially signed contract. Repeating ND's mistake of letting go their coaches too quickly would put us in a place I do not want even think about. RR FTW.
April 16th, 2010 at 10:08 PM ^
If we were to fire RR after this year, I can't see another top spread offense coach coming here. I also can't see another elite coach coming here, after all of the shit that Rich Rod has had to put up with.
We're on the verge of putting together an elite team, and to kill it after one more season would be a travesty.
We are Michigan, we don't fire coaches after 3 seasons. We're better than that. That's what Sparty, the SEC, and short sighted programs do, but we're smart enough to understand that patience pays off. After all, we do live by the mantra that those who stay will be champions.
April 16th, 2010 at 10:20 PM ^
You can't see another elite coach coming here? Seriously? Share what you're smoking. This is Michigan. It's an elite job that coaches would kill for.
Also, let's not excuse RichRod from some of the problems we now face. Yes, the press on been very tough on him. Yes, I'd like to see that attention on Dantonio. But RR did violate NCAA regs and lose games (all the other stuff aside). That was his fault...and he deals with it as anyone would.
Maybe he does well this season. I sure hope so, but this notion that we need a "spread" coach if RR must be replaced is a bit off. We could have a coach who dwells in the middle. It's not spread-pro-or-nothing.
April 16th, 2010 at 10:46 PM ^
I normally would agree with that premise that anybody would want this job, but oddly enough it didn't seem like people were beating down the door the last time the job opened up were they? They kind of got down the list a little bit before they hired Rich.
I would guess if they had to hire a coach that they would stay in the family this time since that seems to be so important to a lot of the high rollers, but a lot of the old cronies makes me want to hide my eyes. English? Debord? Hoke? Even Harbaugh had some shitty years out at Stanford. Are we sure we wanna go the old blue route?
Yea, the last time this job was open, the first two guys that were offered, (Schiano, Miles) both turned it down. So, clearly every coach was ready to kill for this job. So much so, that we were in a panic for a month before Rich Rod was finally offered the job.
So, with the media absolutely killing the coach, and much of the well to do alumni following in their footsteps, I'm sure that the job will be even more appealing after RR is run out of town, especially with all of those NCAA sanctions looming on the horizon from his "immoral" behavior.
And you want to know what I'm smoking? Haha, clearly it's nothing compared to what you're toking over there in imagination land.
that follows a legend. You can say that "Bo-Mo-Carr" was collectively the legend. It took a guy with balls agree to change the stale taste the program was facing. Until the Cap 1 Bowl, the offense needed a spark. People were crying for a change and wanting Carr out. So the situation wont really be any different then it was back when we were sweating "who is our coach." RR will get 5 years. He will get the time to get a full class through the program. If he doesn't, Michigan will be a Poison Pill program to all the elite coaches. We would be looking at the guy who runs the rec center at the local Boys and Girls club to coach.
He wasn't exactly an elite level coach before leaving Youngstown St. You don't always have to go get the best of the best.... it's ok to go get a proven winner at a FCS school.
How about another guy that fits that description. BO.
April 17th, 2010 at 12:37 AM ^
... maybe Harbaugh?
Not advocating for it, but not ruling it out, either. And, FWIW, I think that a coach like Harbaugh could do fine with RichRod's personnel. He's more pro-style than spread option, but I think Harbaugh would make out just fine with a QB like Forcier.
April 16th, 2010 at 10:41 PM ^
and a crappy Bowl game invite.
As you pointed out, RR's first full recruiting class won't be upperclassmen until next year. If we got rid of him now, would we really be able to say we know what he could do with a team that is not composed of inexperienced players, freshmen, and walk-ons?
However, the gears shift dramatically in 2011. Keeping him around now is not because we are being charitable. It is because he needs to show what he can do with experienced players, players experienced in his system.
In 2011, he has that. In 2011 he MUST contend for the B10.
While any old Bowl game is good enough for 2010 while work is still in process, in 2011 he must return Michigan to its New Years Bowl game birthright.
That is what he was brought here to do, at a minimum.
I wish these people would STFU. That decision is entirely up to Brandon, not these douchebag sports writers and so called prognosticators. If Brandon wants to retain him after a sub .500 season, then so be it. He doesn't need every Tom, Dick, and Harry with access to the 'net to tell him how to do his job.
in a program like UMs, steeped in tradition and lots and lots of donor money, it will never be fully up to the AD to keep a coach
I gave you a point only because I didn't mean to neg you.
Donors and boosters can only incentivize the university, they'll never be in a position to decide anything. The pres and and AD are the only opinions that matter. If a president were to undermine their AD by firing a coach directly, they'd probably have to find a new AD also...good luck with a search under those circumstances.
Bottom line, the AD is the only opinion that actaully matters.
Al Glick.... if you don't think that booster's opinions matter you are on crack.
The money Glick gave gets him his name on a building and the chance to stop by the AD's office, but any personnel decisions are the AD's alone. He knew that going in.
April 18th, 2010 at 12:24 AM ^
I didn't say Al Glick's opinion doesn't matter. I said he's not in a position to make personnel decisions in the AD. The only decision he is in the position to make is whether or not to keep giving his money to the University.
My statement that the only opinion that matters is in the AD is in regard to the determination of RichRod's fate as HC at Michigan,
So you don't think that if Al Glick said "hey, I will give the football program 4 million to buyout RR's contract, lets get a new coach," that dave brandon would at least listen to that. I know Al Glick personally, and he would never do this, so I am in now way insinuating that he would, but a donor with his kind of money says fire the coach and I will personally buyout the contract, the AD has to listen, it would make no business sense if he didn't.
Why is this so confusing? Al Glick doesn't decide if RichRod stays or goes. In your scenario, Al would say something along the lines of the following: "hey Dave, I don't think it's going to work out with Rich. I think you to buy-out his contract. I'll cover the bill." If Brandon think RichRod needs more time, then he'd respond "That's very generous of you Al, but I don't think that's the best option right now." At that point Al would escalate, come out publically, whatever. He would give Brandon (dis-)incentives to agree with him, but he wouldn't finalize anything.
If the buy-out were an issue preventing Rich Rod from being let go, Brandon would approach the boosters and say: "look guys, I think its in the best interest of the University to part ways with Rodriguez, but the department needs some boosting in order to make the move. Can we count on you for support?"
In either scenario, Brandon's opinion is the one that determines RichRod's fate, not Glick's.
The AD at Michigan (Martin, Brandon, whoever) would listen to a major donors' offer for political reasons only. Assuming the AD wanted to keep a coach and a major booster didn't, you can't outright tell a big booster to get lost so you play politics and hear them out. Obviously this is all totally hypothetical, but I doubt any AD would be bullied into a decision like that unless they were facing a strong majority.
April 17th, 2010 at 12:39 AM ^
Just because I don't think he wants to start his tenure off by creating even more dismay. Brandon can afford to give RichRod another season, even if we blow again in 2010.
You're right that there will be outside pressure, but I think Brandon will side with RichRod unless the 2010 is an absolute disaster.
I get the impression that Brandon is a pretty strong and confident AD. I don't see him rolling over because he is afraid of some booster or Mary.
Nothing is more obnoxious than seeing a "Number of Wins to Keep his job?" thread.
Personally, I think a bowl game is the standard.
I like how you say nothing is more annoying than a thread like this...
...and then you basically say "6 wins is enough to keep his job."
Cause if so, that'd help a LOT.
Saying any coach anywhere needs 10 wins to keep their job is foolish. USC didn't win 10 games last year. That's a high bar for anyone.
That said, I think 7-5 regular season, regardless of bowl result, will be enough for him to keep his job. If we had a senior laden team, it would be different. But 7-5 regular season proves steady improvement, and that's hard to disagree with. Considering the talent that we'll have coming back after this fall, 7-5 regular season will probably put us into preseason top-25's for 2011, and rarely do coaches get fired who have their teams in preseason top-25's.
10 wins is ludicrous. I think if RR can show significant signs of improvement with this still very young team, I think he will get another year. If we have to put a number on it, I'd say 7-8, regardless of bowl result.
That would mean 5-5 in real games, up from 2-7 last year. With (most likely) 8 defensive and 10 offensive starters returning for 2011, that would put us in good shape.
Apparently this woman has been pestering Rittenberg for months now yammering about Coach Rod's employment future. The idea that Michigan would dismiss Rodriguez after a 9 win campaign is absolutely ridiculous. Why would Brandon fire a guy who is demonstrating a clear progression forward? It's just beyond idiotic.
MICHIGAN! ANYTHING LESS THAN A NC IS UNACCEPTABLE!!!!
It doesn't require advanced football knowledge to see how good the 2011 team could potentially be. I wouldn't put it past other Big 10 fanbases to beat the "Fire Rich Rod" drum throughout this year, just because some don't think they have a chance if both Michigan and Ohio State are dominant programs.
April 17th, 2010 at 12:42 AM ^
But if we suck in 2010, are you sure that it doesn't require advanced football knowledge to see how good we'll be in 2011?
We will finally have talent and depth. Considering that those were our main problems in the past two years, by 2011 we should actually be able to see why we hired Rich Rodriguez as our coach.
-My wife as she rolls her eyes-